Rial Juan wrote:

> On Mar 29 Joseph S. Gardner wrote:
>
> > From what I can find a CRC error is Cyclic Redunancy Check but I have no
> > clue what it means or what caused it.  I can tell you that the machine
> > has been up and running almost flawlessly 24/7 since October.
>
> I once knew the details about this, but I already took that exam last year, so I
> already forgot ;)
>
> Anyway, it sorta boils down to this: since harddrives can write erroneous data
> (a glitch in the circuits can cause this) it's best not only to write the
> information you need to the disk, but also some extra info that can help you
> determine if the data on disk is error free. For example a parity bit, that is
> set to 1 if there's an odd number of 1's in the preceding byte, or to 0 if
> there's an even number of 1's.
>
> Of course, a parity bit only helps you detect an error, and it doesn't even do a
> pretty good job at it. So they invented more sophisticated ways of telling if a
> byte was written right or wrong. But that only helpt them to determine the wrong
> bytes; it offered only error-check; not error-correction. So they pondered
> somewhat further along the road, and finally came up with something that would
> help them detect errors, and in most cases even correct them. The CRC-check is
> one such algorithm.
>
> The CRC-error you got could be caused by shutting down the computer while it was
> writing data to disk, or it could be caused due to the computer hanging while it
> was writing to disk. Just imagine what would happen if it's writing to disk, and
> halfway there it suddenly hangs... Especially since linux doesn't write to disk
> rightaway, but buffers write-data in memory to flush it to disk every once in a
> while.
>
> Anyway, due to the way in which Linux is written, it is impossible for a regular
> application to "hang" the PC. Explaining this would require too much space, but
> if you're interrested in the matter, I suggest you pick up a copy of "Operating
> System concepts" by Abraham Silberschatz and Peter Baer Galvin (Addison-Wesley)
> from the library.
>
> It might appear as if the system is hanging, eg because it's in an infinite
> loop, and too busy to respond to anything... But in theory it shouldn't have
> crashed. But then again; my box often crashed a while back too, when I was in X.
> I also believed it was X that was causing all this trouble, which in theory was
> impossible; in the end as a kinda last-resort solution I had my ethernet card
> and sound card trade places, and problem solved. Now it runs for days in X
> without crashing once. It would run weeks or ever years, but I sometimes like to
> reboot to W95 for some serious gaming ;)
>
> --
>
> Rial Juan                        <http://nighty.ulyssis.org>
>                 e-mail:              [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

Thanks Rial,

The curious thing is that the thing has run great for so long until I installed
7.0-2 to get some new features I wanted.  The disk cache makes a lot of sense except
that the machine was left in this "hung" mode for several hours last night until I
got home to check it out.  I wonder if it is possible that something might be
interupting the disk write (several people have sugested Java in Netscape)

Things to ponder


Thanks
--
Joseph S. Gardner
Senior Designer / Technical Support
Kirby Co.,  Cleveland, OH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Linux is like a wigwam...
No windows, no gates.
Apache inside

Registered linux user #1696600
ICQ #63389227


Reply via email to